If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The Staff and Management of getDPI apologise for the inconvenience caused by the "Front page" being out of service. Work crews have been dispatched to identify the source of the difficulty.

Re: tit for tat

I don't understand the issue with field of view?

Shoot with set width boundries and crop the film shot to 1.33X factor. The lens draw remains the same whether on a crop frame digital M or a film M. Leave the tripod stationary, shoot M8, then swap and shoot the film M ... crop the film shot to match the digital crop. If you do this test, it should be a high resolution scan.
(What would be even better is to print the film as a silver print and the M8 as a digital print.) IMO, the ISO should be the same. If 160 film is used that's what the M8 should be set to.

As for making up one's mind before hand ... that's a two way street is it not?

Re: Analog Dreams are Over

I beginto wonder at your real level of experience with analogue Jono,judging by your last comments,I think there may be more of a discussion if I was to bark at a different digital tree,one with analogue branches,so thanks for the entertainment,catch you later,Neil.

Re: Analog Dreams are Over

Originally Posted by jonoslack

film is designed to get the black blacks and white whites which we all love (I'm not being sarcastic), I think that this makes it hard to get the mid tone subtleties, especially when you then go on to scan the negative - the grain (which is also lovely) exacerbates this situation.

Jono, I respectfully think you've got it backwards here. I think film makes it easier to distinguish midtone subtleties, which are present in both good digital (ie, A900) and film, but take more processing expertise to bring out with digital.

I've yet to see any digital black and white with nice tonality that wasn't processed skillfully. This is evidenced by the fact that there isn't a digital camera around that gets great results with the in-camera black and white JPEG option (IMO). I have seen film black and white with nice tonality without any special care paid to developing and subsequent processing.

Re: Analog Dreams are Over

Originally Posted by nei1

I beginto wonder at your real level of experience with analogue Jono,judging by your last comments,I think there may be more of a discussion if I was to bark at a different digital tree,one with analogue branches,so thanks for the entertainment,catch you later,Neil.

Perhaps, as Marc says - this is an argument which could be reversed?
I've never claimed great experience (even though I shot analogue for 20 years). But then, I'm not criticising film either.

Re: Analog Dreams are Over

Originally Posted by Amin

Jono, I respectfully think you've got it backwards here. I think film makes it easier to distinguish midtone subtleties, which are present in both good digital (ie, A900) and film, but take more processing expertise to bring out with digital.

I've yet to see any digital black and white with nice tonality that wasn't processed skillfully. This is evidenced by the fact that there isn't a digital camera around that gets great results with the in-camera black and white JPEG option (IMO). I have seen film black and white with nice tonality without any special care paid to developing and subsequent processing.

HI Amin
I was really talking about scanned film - but I'll accept your correction.

Re: Analog Dreams are Over

Sorry guys but this thread is becoming circular. It is now hard to tell what were the original positions and the explanations seem to be getting further and further from the point. No one is really learning here any longer (if indeed ever) so why not go with what you love and believe in and recognize that there is no one size fits all. JMHO

Re: Analog Dreams are Over

Originally Posted by woodyspedden

Sorry guys but this thread is becoming circular. It is now hard to tell what were the original positions and the explanations seem to be getting further and further from the point. No one is really learning here any longer (if indeed ever) so why not go with what you love and believe in and recognize that there is no one size fits all. JMHO

Re: Analog Dreams are Over

I tend to have a 66 to 75 percent keeper rate on film which makes scanning a bit tiring. At that rate I simply scan all images. I have little doubt shooting 35mm film is worth it. Its 120 that I question. Is there still a place for a 80mm f2.8 planar?

Re: Analog Dreams are Over

Originally Posted by kipkeston

I tend to have a 66 to 75 percent keeper rate on film which makes scanning a bit tiring. At that rate I simply scan all images. I have little doubt shooting 35mm film is worth it. Its 120 that I question. Is there still a place for a 80mm f2.8 planar?

Re: Analog Dreams are Over

My time is very limited too (2 very young kids)! But I recently purchased a Zeiss Ikon because as I learn more about photography (I'm most interested in B&W) I'm drawn primarily to film imagery. Plus, I like the rangefinder design and viewfinder. I figure I'll give it some time and see how it pans out. With my first few rolls I'll have a good local lab develop and scan them. At least that way I can save some time. And I don't plan on shooting a lot so the cost won't be prohibitive.

To my eye film and digital are different and there is a place for both.

Re: Analog Dreams are Over

I have struggled with the same thing in the M line for awhile now. I really like the M8, but am just not using it enough. It has really turned into a personal camera only and other needs are hitting.

You know the drill, too many cameras and not enough time. Several things are going on the block this week.

Another struggle on the film side is how to manage color or B&W. I finally gave up on color film when developed locally here in Phoenix, as the two "Pro" labs leave it scratched or looking like someone moonlighting from KFC (grease) processed it. I do love real B&W, so have taken to developing it myself and scanning on a Nikon.

Just sold the M8 & am keeping the M7. That means that I'm gonna sell the 28 cron also, as I don't like that focal length on film even though it is a great lens. Personal work with the M7 is going to be 35/50/90, which are the only frame lines in mine.

Digital still stays as that is what pays bills, but in the form of a Nikon and the Hasselblad.

Hopefully someday, you will play film some more. Not getting into the film vs. digital debate, as they are different and both great. Funny thing is that I'm getting more enjoyment from shooting the M7 in film than from the M8. I just naturally slow down and really plan the shot.

You may find that posting film to somewhere for development is feasible. I do a fast single pass scan at 8 bit of the entire roll to see what really deserves more time and then do a good scan on the keepers only. It really saves time.